Personal questionnaires of installations - Psychodiagnostics...

Personal questionnaires of installations

The concept of installation in psychology is often defined as the expressed orientation of the individual to react positively or negatively to a certain class of stimuli, situations, events. It is obvious that settings can not be observed directly, but can be derived from external observation, both verbal and non-verbal. In life practice, the term installation most often associated with social events and with emotionally colored responses of the individual to these events. Very often the term installation is replaced by the term opinion & quot ;, and these two concepts are used interchangeably. The relationship between what a person says and what he does, between publicly stated attitudes and their particular expression, between attitudes manifested in difficult (critical) situations, can be considered as a special case of validity. Scales of relations and opinion polls can be valid for a number of criteria, such as:

- the ratio of the individual to the opposite social groups,

- his assessment of close acquaintances,

- biographical data obtained during a conversation with the subject,

- medical history, etc.

But because of the practical difficulties in obtaining such criterial data, researchers and method designers often refer to more familiar methods as palliative measures, for example, to the validity of internal consistency or to correlation with other scales of attitudes and opinions.

For the quantitative measurement of the relative position of an individual in a one-dimensional continuum of installations, scales of installations were created. For the first time L.. Thurstone along with E. Chave (1959) applied psychological questionnaires to quantify the data on opinions. This was an important milestone in the construction of scales of installations. The scale of the Thurston type (Thurstone-tipe Attitude Scales) can be explained using the scale for measuring the attitude to the church.

At the first stage, a large number of statements about the church are gathered: various groups of people are invited to write their opinion on the church in writing. This list is supplemented with statements about the church, taken from contemporary literature. Then the statements are distributed as evaluating the church extremely benevolent - neutral - extremely unfavorable & quot ;. From the material collected in this way, a list of 130 carefully edited short statements was compiled.

Each of these selected statements was then printed on separate cards that were distributed to 300 experts to distribute them in 11 headings, denoted by the letters of the Latin alphabet from A to K. The experts were asked to put in the pile A statements in which, in their opinion , the church was given the highest mark; in the pile F - statements expressing a neutral attitude towards it; in a pile of K - utterances expressing complete rejection of the church. In the intervening space between these letters piles of cards with statements about the church, corresponding to the degree of sympathetic or unfriendly attitude toward the church, should have formed.

The percentage of experts who put statements in different piles served as the initial data for calculating the scale price of statements, which can be reflected in a special chart. On the horizontal axis (the abscissa axis) of the graph, according to the number of headings from A to K, numbers from 1 to 11 are arranged, treated as equally distributed units of measure. The vertical axis (ordinate axis) gives the percentage of experts who rated this judgment for this heading or lower, to the left of it. Percentile 50, or the median position attributed by experts to this statement, is noted directly on the graph. Responding to the scale of installations of the type of the Thurstounian individual marks all the statements with which he agrees. The individual indicator of the type and severity of its installation is the median scale value of the noted utterances.

A different approach to constructing scales of installations proposed P. Likert (1932). When using it, it is not necessary to classify tasks by a group of experts. Tasks are selected based on the respondents' answers to the standardization sample by the criterion of internal consistency.

In addition, Likert's scales (Liken-tipe Attitude Scales) require grading of each statement, usually in five categories:

- completely agree,

- I agree,

- I'm not sure

- I do not agree,

- completely disagree.

Each answer has its own quantitative assessment. The sum of scores for all tasks is an indicator of the individual, which is compared with the norms.

When constructing scales, installations are also used by other methods, in particular by forced selection or paired comparisons.

Assessing the psychometric parameters of the scales of installations existing in the United States, A. Anastasi notes the lack of information about the norms and validity. Based on this, it recognizes their suitability for research projects rather than for practical applications. However, in a number of cases they are also used to solve practical problems - to evaluate the results of different educational programs, educational procedures, trainings, to ascertain the attitudes and morale of hired workers, etc.

The person's most important attitude is connected with the evaluation of their effectiveness in life and is reflected in the so-called attribution styles. The causal interpretation of the behavior (of one's own and others) is called causal attribution. Its selection as an object of research and diagnosis is determined by the work of psychologists who showed that people differ significantly in relation to the preferred attribution. Attribution styles have different names: internal and external control loci (J. Rotter, 1966), perception of self-efficacy (A. Bandura, 1977), "control of the situation as opposed to helplessness in front of her face" (K. Dwick, 1975), according to their essence is similar. These differences between people are manifested when they are asked to explain their successes and failures or some events that affect their happiness and well-being. The essence of these differences lies in the location of their control over events. There are two opposite types of control: external (external), when the individual feels helpless, unable to overcome external obstacles and resist the vicissitudes of fate, and internal (and ), under which the individual feels himself in control of what is happening in his life and who is responsible for his happiness, prosperity, success.

The external and internal types are also characterized by differences in a number of personal characteristics (tolerance, anxiety, depression, self-confidence, self-esteem, etc.) and behaviors (ways of obtaining information, level of conformity, attitude to personal freedom and methods of psychotherapy, activity). The methods of attribution style identification were first developed in the USA in the 60s. XX century. The most famous among them is the locus-control scale J. Rotter (Rotter Internal-External Control Scale, 1966). First, Rotter proposed to create a multidimensional scale, suggesting that in different spheres of human life the locus of control can be expressed in different ways. The first questionnaire consisted of 100 items corresponding to several areas: academic success, social recognition, interpersonal relations, affective situations, dominance, socio-political activity and general outlook. This scale was subjected to factor analysis and reduced to 60 points. Subsequently, it was found that individual subscales correlate among themselves and do not give independent variables. As a result, the questionnaire was reduced to 29 points, of which 6 were camouflage, and became one-dimensional (without the allocation of a subcategory). Each paragraph consists of two opposing statements, one of which is characteristic of internals, and the other is external. The task of the subject is to choose one of the judgments with which he agrees to the greatest degree.

Example

A. Whatever I planned, I'm almost always sure that I will be able to do what I have planned.

B. Planning for future actions is not always reasonable, as much depends on luck.

In the years that followed, attempts were made to isolate the subscales from the Rotter questionnaire. Thus, G. Mirels singled out two factors: control over one's own life and control over socio-political institutions; P. Gurin and co-workers received two independent forms of control: "ideological", fixing a person's inclination to believe that most people can actively influence society, and "personal", showing a person's propensity to believe only in control of his personal life. Some authors have identified a greater number of factors. In the opinion of the researchers, an in-depth study of the ability of the individual to control a particular sphere enriches the concept of the locus of control and information about the individual, therefore the question of finding out the general opinion of the person about the possibility of disposing of his destiny, about isolating the general factor manifested in different situations is not removed.

In domestic practice, three questionnaires that diagnose the locus of control are most often used. First, it's the original "Scale 1-E" Rotter, translated into United States, but not having sufficient psychometric justification on domestic samples; secondly, the questionnaire subjective control localization (OSLC), developed by C. R. Panteleev and In. V. Stalin by based on the Rotter scale. It is one-dimensional (aimed at diagnosing the control locus as a generalized generalized characteristic), contains 32 points (26 diagnostic and 6 masking ones), built on the principle of forced choice of one of the two statements.

Examples

A. Many misfortunes in people's lives are explained by bad luck. B. Human bad luck is the result of their own mistakes.

A. From my experience it follows that if something should happen, it will happen. B. I was convinced that it is better to take a decision on the performance of a certain action than to rely on the case.

The indicator is the sum of the points awarded for choosing the internals alternatives. The higher this index, the higher the internality of the subject. The maximum indicator of internality is 26 points. The norm is 11-18 points.

The questionnaire reflects mainly areas of achievement, interpersonal relations and academic success. The questionnaire is balanced in the direction of attribution (approximately the same number of items is formulated in the first and third person) and on the emotional sign (approximately equal number of items describe positive and negative situations). The questionnaire was tested on students and has high homogeneity and retest reliability. Validity was determined by the method of expert groups, and pragmatic validity - by comparing the data of two groups of students differing in academic achievement, and two groups differing in social activity. The measure of validity was φ-coefficient equal to 0,43 on the first criterion and 0,64 on the second. Thus, the OSLK questionnaire satisfies basic psychometric requirements and can be used in psychological practice.

Third, the subjective control level questionnaire (UCS) created by E is used. F. Bazhin, E. A. Golynkina and A. M. Etkind, which is multidimensional, evaluating the individual characteristics of subjective control in various spheres: achievements, failures, interpersonal relationships, family, production and attitude towards health and illnesses. It consists of 44 items, the statements of which need to express the degree of their agreement on a seven-point scale from -3 (totally disagree) to +3 (completely agree).

Examples

Illness is a matter of chance; if it's destined to get sick, then there's nothing to be done.

I often feel that I have little influence on what happens to me.

After the calculation of raw points, they are transferred to the walls and the USC profile is built, where the straight line, passing through 5.5 steps, corresponds to the norm. Deviations on the scale upwards testify to the internal control, downwards - about the external. The questionnaire has sufficient psychometric characteristics and can be used in practice in relation to adults.

Another questionnaire, reflecting the attitude of the person to the world around him, is a "picture of the world" - Baseline belief scale (BFU) JAFF-BULMANN . This questionnaire was created with the purpose of revealing the differences between the structure of basic beliefs in individuals who survived mental trauma and those who did not encounter extreme events. Out of communication with the clinic, this questionnaire is used to assess the structure of the basic beliefs of the world picture. It proposes to evaluate beliefs on a six-point scale, based on agreement or disagreement with them.

Examples

With decent, good people, failures happen much less often. People are naturally unfriendly and evil. Bad events are distributed among people by accident. A person by nature is kind.

Using this technique, we study such basic beliefs as:

1) goodwill - attitude towards the world and people as being well-intentioned;

2) justice - belief in a just world, the conviction that misfortune and success are punishment or reward for wrong or conformable human behavior

3) controllability - a belief in the ability to control unpleasant situations in a person's life;

4) regularity - belief in the non-random nature of everything that happens in a person's life;

5) self-worth - respect for oneself, conviction of one's own worth for the world;

6) ability to control the situation (SCS) - confidence in your ability to influence the unpleasant events of your life;

7) Good luck - Confidence in your own luck.

Another questionnaire set - Personal questionnaire emotional relationship A. T. Gersild - allows you to encapsulate such qualities of personality that represent the most persistent internal states that affect the attitude of man to himself and the world and reflect the basic components of life.

Measured parameters:

1) loneliness;

2) sensation of meaninglessness of existence;

3) freedom of choice (attitude to authority);

4) hostile attitude;

5) the discrepancy between the real and ideal self;

6) freedom of will;

7) hopelessness;

8) A sense of irreverence ( homelessness ).

In the left half of the questionnaire are the statements selected from typical daily judgments of people, in the right there are three answers to them, from which the subject must choose the one that most suits him.

The maximum evaluation of the degree of expression of the plant according to this method is 8, the minimum - 0 points. If the subject chooses the first answer for a particular judgment, he gets 2 points, if the second one - 1 point, if the third one - 0 points, the fourth option - "I do not know" - is not estimated in any way, which, naturally, is zero. This questionnaire does not include any psychometric parameters.

Example

People say: "This is a question that concerns me personally." Therefore, I would like to better understand it

My opinion on this issue is the following (I choose the following answer):

1. It is not easy for me to see myself as a person who constantly needs help, seeks and accepts help from others in solving their own life problems. I think that I should have the strength and ability to solve personal problems without help.

1. I think so. This is one

from the spheres in which I wanted to (a) personally

understand

2. I think so, for this issue I think for myself is not particularly important, so as to deal with it specifically

3. This has nothing to do with my life

I do not know. I find it difficult to answer this question

2. I feel a great need to constantly compare myself with other people, prove myself that I am above others or at least not worse than others

1. I think so. This is - one of the areas in which I would like to personally understand

2. I think so, but I do not consider this issue to be especially important for me to deal with it specially

3. This has nothing to do with my life

I do not know. I find it difficult to answer this question

The questionnaires of installations also include techniques aimed at diagnosing self-awareness and self-relationship. Attitude to yourself, to your own personality is one of the most important relationships of a person's socio-psychological being.

The most developed in the domestic psychology is the concept of self-consciousness, proposed In. V. Stolin (1983). Considering self-consciousness as any self-description, self-knowledge or a complex of self-esteem, it defines within its concept self-relation as a direct-phenomenological expression of the personal meaning of the self for the subject itself. Self-relationship has its own structure, in accordance with the ideas about which two questionnaires were developed.

The first is the Self-Relationship Questionnaire (OCA), sponsored by VV Stolits and SR Panteleev. It consists of 57 statements that you need to agree with or not.

Examples

When I try to evaluate myself, I first of all see my shortcomings. What happens in me, as a rule, is clear to me.

The analysis of the results is carried out according to five generalized scales and seven additional scales. The additional ones are aimed at measuring the severity of the setting for one or another internal action on the subject's ego. The generalized scales include the following: Scale 5, which measures the integral feeling "for or against own self; Scale I, assessing self-esteem, which is an evaluation aspect of the self-relationship; scale II - autosympathy, reflecting these or other feelings in their own address; Scale III, reflecting the expectations of a positive or negative attitude to others; scale IV - self-interest reflects a measure of closeness to oneself, a degree of interest in one's own thoughts and feelings. Thus, self-relationship is represented as a complex level system, the analysis of which can be carried out at different levels or sections.

This approach to the diagnosis of the self-relationship was criticized because of the notion of single-order and dimensionality of measurements when it is assumed that the individual components of the self-relationship (self-esteem, autosympathy, etc.) make an independent and identical contribution to the integral feeling "for" or against I. In this case, it is not taken into account that psychologically individuals, differing in the contribution of different components to the overall self-relationship, will not be the same. Thus, a person characterized by a lack of self-esteem with a high level of autosympathy is not equivalent to an individual whose lack of autosympathy is compensated by high self-esteem. The psychological content of the self-relationship will be different in these cases.

Therefore, SR Panteleev suggested that the self-relationship has a qualitative specificity for each subject. It is not a sum of emotional manifestations, but is embodied in everyone's own modality: for some, it is experienced primarily in the form of self-esteem, for others - in the form of sympathy for oneself and so on. The system of self-relation is not additive, but is built on the principle of dynamic hierarchy, when this or that modality can act as a nuclear component that has a leading place in the hierarchy of emotional attitudes and determines the content and expression of a general self-relationship (SR Pantileev, 1991).

On this theoretical basis With. R.Paptileev developed another questionnaire for the diagnosis of self-relationship (1993) '.

This is a methodology for investigating a self-relationship (MIS), consisting of PO claims, with which you need to agree or not. Along with singling out two of the five common factors (aspects) of the self-relationship - self-esteem and autosympathy discussed above, there is one more factor - self-deprecation, reflecting self-blame and internal conflict. In addition to common factors, processing is also carried out on additional (private). There are nine of them.

Examples

Often I do not play tricks on myself.

My merits completely outweigh my shortcomings.

I doubt that I am sympathetic to the majority of others.

Both questionnaires have satisfactory psychometric indicators and criteria for estimating individual data (percentiles).

Thus, in the arsenal of psychodiagnostic techniques, personal questionnaires of various kinds occupy a significant place, aimed at measuring and analyzing the essential diverse aspects of the personality. Psychometric checks of these instruments are continuing.

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.